Bennett gave instruction in midwifery at Willoughby University in Ohio in 1834, a university he helped create. He did get favorable reviews from his students.
"Any over-ritualized religion since the dawn of time can make its priests say yes, we know, it is rotten, and hard luck, but just do as we say, keep at the ritual, stick it out, give us your money and you'll end up with the angels in heaven for evermore."
So how many girls under 18 does one have to marry to be considered a pedophile?
Potentially none by definition. By this logic, you're accusing every Jr high school student (or everyone who ever was) of being a pedophile.
Really? Is that where this logic leads? Has everyone in your experience that has been a male Jr high school student--yourself, your sons, the teenage boys in your ward while you have been bishop, etc.--married a girl under 18?
I never did marry a girl under 18. So kind of blows your logical extension there.
Buffalo wrote: Now, maybe it's true, and maybe it isn't. But there's no evidence that the marriages were platonic.
Considering that we have plenty of evidence of sexual relations with a number of wives including at least one with a current husband, it is more reasonable that none of the marriages were considered platonic whether sexual relations had happened. That is just a crazy apologetic for those who don't want to believe Joseph had sex with his wives, but somehow are fine that BY and others did. With Helen though I think the little evidence we have suggests sex had not happened at that time. I see no reason to think that when this marriage was negotiated instead of marrying Kimball's wife that Joseph was to wait for a little while before engaging in sex with her.
Themis wrote: That is just a crazy apologetic for those who don't want to believe Joseph had sex with his wives, but somehow are fine that BY and others did.
More likely, the apologists never thought about it, until some critic brought it up... then they had to scramble to patch something together and that is the result of the patch job.
(Nevo, Jan 23) And the Melchizedek Priesthood may not have been restored until the summer of 1830, several months after the organization of the Church.
harmony wrote:More likely, the apologists never thought about it, until some critic brought it up... then they had to scramble to patch something together and that is the result of the patch job.
I just will never understand why it's so important to insist that he didn't have sex with his wives. Hardly anyone in the church thinks Brigham Young did anything wrong by sleeping with his wives, but for some reason, all bets are off when it comes to Joseph Smith.
harmony wrote:More likely, the apologists never thought about it, until some critic brought it up... then they had to scramble to patch something together and that is the result of the patch job.
I just will never understand why it's so important to insist that he didn't have sex with his wives. Hardly anyone in the church thinks Brigham Young did anything wrong by sleeping with his wives, but for some reason, all bets are off when it comes to Joseph Smith.
And on the other side of the coin If it could be shown that Joseph Smith did not think sex was part of his restored polygamy, where does that leave BY and the rest of the members who were ''practicing' polygamist?
"Any over-ritualized religion since the dawn of time can make its priests say yes, we know, it is rotten, and hard luck, but just do as we say, keep at the ritual, stick it out, give us your money and you'll end up with the angels in heaven for evermore."
harmony wrote:More likely, the apologists never thought about it, until some critic brought it up... then they had to scramble to patch something together and that is the result of the patch job.
I just will never understand why it's so important to insist that he didn't have sex with his wives. Hardly anyone in the church thinks Brigham Young did anything wrong by sleeping with his wives, but for some reason, all bets are off when it comes to Joseph Smith.
Because it would prove that he was a liar, and that he destroyed the Nauvoo Expositor's press for selfish, personal reasons. BY never kept his spiritual wifery a secret, and openly proclaimed it.
Last edited by Guest on Fri Jan 27, 2012 9:57 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"A man is accepted into a church for what he believes and he is turned out for what he knows." - Samuel Clemens
The name of the "king" in Facsimile No. 3 of the Book of Abraham is Isis. Yes...that is her name.
aranyborju wrote:Because it would prove that he was a liar, and that he destroyed the Nauvoo Expositer's press for selfish, personal reasons. BY never kept his spiritual wifery a secret, and openly proclaimed it.
I guess that's maybe what it is. I just find it odd.
harmony wrote:More likely, the apologists never thought about it, until some critic brought it up... then they had to scramble to patch something together and that is the result of the patch job.
I just will never understand why it's so important to insist that he didn't have sex with his wives. Hardly anyone in the church thinks Brigham Young did anything wrong by sleeping with his wives, but for some reason, all bets are off when it comes to Joseph Smith.
This.
Except, of course, I don't think BY had any wives he married when they were still young teens. Maybe that's the real problem--although I doubt very many members even know that some of Joseph Smith's wives were so young.
"I do not want you to think that I am very righteous, for I am not." Joseph Smith (History of the Church 5:401)